Copyright Infringement != Theft

Re:Copyright Infringement != Theft by jfarmer on Tuesday June 03, 2008 @02:00AM (#207691)

You specifically equated the "theft" of a song with the theft of a car, but your definition of theft ignores the difference between theft and copyright infringement. These are distinct concepts, legally, historically, and philosophically.

Sorry if I misinterpreted what you were saying, but it sounded like you were arguing that there's a moral force behind copyright and that it rests in its similarity to theft.

I'll update my article accordingly.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Copyright Infringement != Theft by mattmaroon on Tuesday June 03, 2008 @04:31AM (#207754)

I equated them only in the sense that they are both natural human behaviors. You could just as easily replace it with "piracy of a song", and the argument would have been the same.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Copyright Infringement != Theft by josefresco on Tuesday June 03, 2008 @08:45AM (#207837)

The choice of words is very important and not trivial in the least. Notice how you just said "piracy of a song", when in fact the copying of a song is not "piracy" which equates to robbery aka theft.

The words we choose are very important when discussing ideas, just ask the republicans who have used this technique for years to sway the public to their side on various social and political matters (death tx vs. estate tax being one example).

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Copyright Infringement != Theft by mattmaroon on Tuesday June 03, 2008 @05:00PM (#208335)

If the people who engage in it call it theft or piracy, because they think they are stealing, then it's morally equivalent.

I agree with you about choosing words carefully, but either choice doesn't change the article. In context, the semantics were irrelevant.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Copyright Infringement != Theft by jfarmer on Wednesday June 04, 2008 @12:10AM (#208579)

The people who engage in it don't call it theft or piracy. At least not any of the ones I know.

[ Parent | on HN ]